Michael B Gatch1, Sean B Dolan2, Michael J Forster2. 1. Center for Neuroscience Discovery, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd, Fort Worth, TX, 76107-2699, USA. michael.gatch@unthsc.edu. 2. Center for Neuroscience Discovery, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd, Fort Worth, TX, 76107-2699, USA.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Recent years have seen an increase in the recreational use of novel, synthetic psychoactive substances. There are little or no data on the abuse liability of many of the newer compounds. OBJECTIVES: The current study investigated the discriminative stimulus and locomotor effects of a series of synthetic analogs of cathinone: α-pyrrolidinopropiophenone (α-PPP), α-pyrrolidinohexiophenone (α-PHP), α-pyrrolidinopentiothiophenone (α-PVT), 3,4-methylenedioxybutiophenone (MDPBP), and ethylone. METHODS: Locomotor activity was assessed in an open-field assay using Swiss-Webster mice. Discriminative stimulus effects were assessed in Sprague-Dawley rats trained to discriminate either cocaine or methamphetamine from vehicle. RESULTS: Each of the compounds produced an inverted-U dose-effect on locomotor activity. Maximal effects were similar among the test compounds, but potencies varied with relative potencies of MDPBP > α-PPP = α-PHP > ethylone > α-PVT. Each of the test compounds substituted fully for the discriminative stimulus effects of methamphetamine. α-PPP, α-PHP, and ethylone fully substituted for cocaine. α-PVT produced a maximum of 50% cocaine-appropriate responding, and MDPBP produced an inverted-U-shaped dose-effect curve with maximum effects of 67%. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide initial evidence that these structurally similar, emerging novel psychoactive substances demonstrate potential for abuse and may be utilized for their stimulant-like effects, given their ability to stimulate locomotor activity and their substitution for the discriminative stimulus effects of the classical psychostimulants cocaine and/or methamphetamine.
RATIONALE: Recent years have seen an increase in the recreational use of novel, synthetic psychoactive substances. There are little or no data on the abuse liability of many of the newer compounds. OBJECTIVES: The current study investigated the discriminative stimulus and locomotor effects of a series of synthetic analogs of cathinone: α-pyrrolidinopropiophenone (α-PPP), α-pyrrolidinohexiophenone (α-PHP), α-pyrrolidinopentiothiophenone (α-PVT), 3,4-methylenedioxybutiophenone (MDPBP), and ethylone. METHODS: Locomotor activity was assessed in an open-field assay using Swiss-Webster mice. Discriminative stimulus effects were assessed in Sprague-Dawley rats trained to discriminate either cocaine or methamphetamine from vehicle. RESULTS: Each of the compounds produced an inverted-U dose-effect on locomotor activity. Maximal effects were similar among the test compounds, but potencies varied with relative potencies of MDPBP > α-PPP = α-PHP > ethylone > α-PVT. Each of the test compounds substituted fully for the discriminative stimulus effects of methamphetamine. α-PPP, α-PHP, and ethylone fully substituted for cocaine. α-PVT produced a maximum of 50% cocaine-appropriate responding, and MDPBP produced an inverted-U-shaped dose-effect curve with maximum effects of 67%. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide initial evidence that these structurally similar, emerging novel psychoactive substances demonstrate potential for abuse and may be utilized for their stimulant-like effects, given their ability to stimulate locomotor activity and their substitution for the discriminative stimulus effects of the classical psychostimulants cocaine and/or methamphetamine.
Entities:
Keywords:
Abuse; Cathinones; Drug discrimination; Locomotor activity; Mouse; Rat
Authors: L D Simmler; T A Buser; M Donzelli; Y Schramm; L-H Dieu; J Huwyler; S Chaboz; M C Hoener; M E Liechti Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Iain M McIntyre; Catherine E Hamm; James L Sherrard; Ray D Gary; Christopher G Burton; Othon Mena Journal: J Anal Toxicol Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: J L Katz; G E Agoston; K L Alling; R H Kline; M J Forster; W L Woolverton; T A Kopajtic; A H Newman Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: A Schneir; B T Ly; K Casagrande; M Darracq; S R Offerman; S Thornton; C Smollin; R Vohra; C Rangun; C Tomaszewski; R R Gerona Journal: Clin Toxicol (Phila) Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 4.467
Authors: Julie A Marusich; Kateland R Antonazzo; Jenny L Wiley; Bruce E Blough; John S Partilla; Michael H Baumann Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Brenda M Gannon; Kayla I Galindo; Melson P Mesmin; Agnieszka Sulima; Kenner C Rice; Gregory T Collins Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2017-08-12 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Azizi Ray; Neha Milind Chitre; Cedrick Maceo Daphney; Bruce E Blough; Clinton E Canal; Kevin Sean Murnane Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Brenda M Gannon; Michael H Baumann; Donna Walther; Cristian Jimenez-Morigosa; Agnieszka Sulima; Kenner C Rice; Gregory T Collins Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2018-09-10 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Robert W Seaman; Michelle R Doyle; Agnieszka Sulima; Kenner C Rice; Gregory T Collins Journal: Behav Pharmacol Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 2.277
Authors: Mariana Angoa-Pérez; Branislava Zagorac; Andrew D Winters; Jonathan M Greenberg; Madison Ahmad; Kevin R Theis; Donald M Kuhn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 3.240